About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
unraveling of the obama administration's foreign policy. >> this was a terrorist attack on 9/11 that took the life of a united states ambassador, an american ambassador. this is serious stuff. americans deserve the truth on what happened. >> greta: so u.n. ambassador rice resign? earlier former secretary of defense donald rumsfeld went on the secretary. mr. secretary, nice to see you, sir. >> thank you. good to be with you. >> greta: there are many calls for ambassador to the u.n., susan rice, to resign. she has the backup of the secretary of state and the president, but there are calls for her to resign after going on all the talk shows and pushing this youtube video as the reason, the cause. your thoughts, sir? >> well, that's really up to the president and ambassador as far as i'm concerned. i think that the president can nominate who he wants, and the senate confirmed her. and she's the ambassador while she's there. i watched the presentation. and i thought it was amazing that someone in her position would go on with that degree of certainty, that fast, and that authoritiatively and b
of preemptive strike against iran, imagine that happens, what does the obama administration do if it's still in power come november and the election? what do you do? >> well, i mean, that's the dilemma in terms of turning to military action that may well be necessary at some point. israel probably has -- certainly has the capability to in some ways delay, you know, the advance towards that nuclear line, but perhaps does not have the ability to destroy the entire program. and that's the conundrum when you get to military action is in many respects, if you start this fight, one of two things has to happen. you have to continue to regime change as we did in iraq. that's a legitimate policy option but obviously a very expensive one. but the other is should it not destroy iran's nuclear program, you probably make that iranian bomb inevitable, because you can destroy facilities but you can't destroy knowledge. >> richard williamson, let's assume mitt romney wins in november. his rhetoric has been even stronger against president ahmadinejad and iran. what would a romney administration do if israel
have been critical of the u.s. policy toward iran. saying the obama administration has a cavalier attitude. how do they have a cavalier attitude? >> the idea you are going to stop them from becoming nuclear by just saying things like all options are on the table or -- >> isn't that what mitt romney said, all options are on the table? >> mitt romney is not the president of the united states. the president of the united states should be communicating he will take military action. >> no person says we are going to bomb you. george w. bush said all options are on the table. >> i remember they did that with ronald reagan. he was pretty successful. reagan said he was going to take military action and pointed missiles and made it clear. >> so reagan said all options are on the table plenty of times. >> this was a long time ago when bush was dealing with iran. iran was five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten years away from becoming nuclear. iran now could be a month away, two months away, two years away. under president obama iran has by three times increased the uranium and made it much more
: mr. burns, why don't you begin by explaining how you think he administration handled libya? guest: let me just say, i've worked for democratic and republican administrations, and i think i.t. is unfair to level such a criticism of the -- president obama. he has been a strong leader in protecting this country, as president bush was, and both presidents since 9/11 have put the security of the american people and homeland security as job number one, as they should. they are both strong in that area, and it is unfair to suggest that president obama has let down our guard. the events in libya were tragic. the responsibility for guarding our embassies and consulates overseas -- we don't have american military protecting our embassies. it is the host country that provides perimeter security rapping out diplomatic establishments. we provide security for foreign embassies in washington, d.c. and consulates in new york city to it could lead us down? in cairo, it was the egyptian government that did not have enough security around pmc, and that is why the crowds went over the walls and a tri
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)